DOCSLIB.ORG

A Review of the Geodesy Calculations in ROPP

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Review of the Geodesy Calculations in ROPP ROM SAF Report 14 Ref: SAF/ROM/METO/REP/RSR/014 Web: www.romsaf.org Date: 16 Oct 2013 ROM SAF Report 14 A review of the geodesy calculations in ROPP Ian Culverwell Met Office, Exeter, UK Culverwell: ROPP geodesy review ROM SAF Report 14 Document Author Table Name Function Date Comments Prepared by: I. D. Culverwell ROM SAF Project Team 16 Oct 2013 Reviewed by: D. Offiler ROM SAF Project Team 27 Feb 2013 Reviewed by: J. R. Eyre ROM SAF Steering Group Member 13 May 2013 Approved by: K. B. Lauritsen ROM SAF Project Manager 26 Sep 2013 Document Change Record Issue/Revision Date By Description 1st draft 25 Feb 2013 IDC First draft, based on report attached to ROPP ticket 159 2nd draft 27 Mar 2013 IDC Corrections following 1st review by DO Version 1.0 11 Sep 2013 IDC Amendments after contacting ROPP-2.0 beta reviewer ROM SAF The Radio Occultation Meteorology Satellite Application Facility (ROM SAF) is a decentralised processing centre under EUMETSAT which is responsible for operational processing of GRAS radio occultation data from the Metop satellites and RO data from other missions. The ROM SAF delivers bending angle, refractivity, temperature, pressure, and humidity profiles in near-real time and offline for NWP and climate users. The offline profiles are further processed into climate products consisting of gridded monthly zonal means of bending angle, refractivity, temperature, humidity, and geopotential heights together with error descriptions. The ROM SAF also maintains the Radio Occultation Processing Package (ROPP) which contains software modules that will aid users wishing to process, quality-control and assimilate radio occulta- tion data from any radio occultation mission into NWP and other models. The ROM SAF Leading Entity is the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI), with Cooperating Entities: i) European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) in Reading, United Kingdom, ii) Institut D’Estudis Espacials de Catalunya (IEEC) in Barcelona, Spain, and iii) Met Office in Exeter, United Kingdom. To get access to our products or to read more about the project please go to: http://www.romsaf.org Intellectual Property Rights All intellectual property rights of the ROM SAF products belong to EUMETSAT. The use of these products is granted to every interested user, free of charge. If you wish to use these products, EU- METSAT’s copyright credit must be shown by displaying the words "copyright (year) EUMETSAT" on each of the products used. ROM SAF Report 14 Culverwell: ROPP geodesy review Abstract This report reviews the geodesy calculations in ROPP,in response to concerns raised by the ROPP2.0 beta reviewer in 2008. Various expressions for the surface gravity, effective radius, radius of curva- ture and geopotential height are compared, and the impact of the differences in RO applications is assessed. Supporting sensitivity studies are reported. A simple model is developed that sheds light on some of the findings. 3 Culverwell: ROPP geodesy review ROM SAF Report 14 Contents 1 Introduction 5 2 Gravity 6 2.1 Variation with latitude . .6 2.2 Variation with altitude . 10 3 Effective radius of Earth 11 4 Geopotential height 14 5 Radius of curvature 16 6 Undulation 20 7 Response to ROPP2.0 beta reviewer’s comments 22 8 Sensitivity studies 24 8.1 Sensitivity to surface gravity . 24 8.2 Sensitivity to effective radius . 27 8.3 Sensitivity to radius of curvature . 29 8.4 Sensitivity to undulation . 31 9 Summary and conclusions 33 10 Appendix: The geodesy of Rodworld 35 10.1 Intoduction . 35 10.2 Absence of rotation . 35 10.2.1 Geopotential . 36 10.2.2 Surface gravity . 36 10.2.3 Effective radius . 37 10.3 Presence of rotation . 40 10.3.1 Geopotential . 40 10.3.2 Surface gravity . 40 10.3.3 Effective radius . 41 10.4 Summary . 41 Bibliography 43 4 ROM SAF Report 14 Culverwell: ROPP geodesy review 1 Introduction Geodesy is the study of the measurement and representation of the Earth, including its gravitational field. A review of the geodesy calculations in ROPP was suggested by the ROPP2.0 beta reviewer ([1]). His concerns were that these calculations are not being done sufficiently accurately and/or consistently in ROPP, and he suggested that the treatment of geodetic terms should be re-examined. There were two main aspects to the reviewer’s concern: insufficient accuracy in the transformation between geometric and geopotential height, and the apparent inconsistency between the effective radius of the Earth and the radius of curvature of the Earth at the tangent point. Lewis ([6]) compared the early ROPP implementations of gravity, effective radius and geopotential, based on expressions in the Smithsonian Meteorological Tables ([14]), and versions which have since been implemented in ROPP, based on Mahoney’s ([8]) calculations using Somigliana’s equation. He found that the fractional differences between the calculations of gravity and of geopotential were negligible (< 10−5), but that the fractional difference in effective radius of 5 × 10−5 equated to 350 m, which was considered excessive. This is why ROPP has consistently used geodesy routines based on Somigliana’s equation since ROPP1.2. A follow-up note (Lewis 2010 pers. comm.) discussed the differences between these later expres- sions for gravity, effective radius and geopotential and those used in the Invert package, which is used to process ROM SAF NRT products. He found various inconsistencies between the two sets of expressions: a 3 × 10−5 fractional difference in the equatorial gravity, and up to 300 m difference in effective radius. The differences in geopotential height were generally less than 1 m, however, and therefore considered negligible. The treatment of the radius of curvature in ROPP has developed since ROPP2.0 was reviewed, and, as the reviewer recommended, expressions involving the true radius of curvature of the section of the ellipsoid intersected by the occultation plane are now used in the ropp_utils/coordinates routines that are used by the ropp_pp module of ROPP. This report attempts to tie all these threads together, and give a coherent account of the current geodesy calculations in ROPP. Throughout the following discussion of the wide range of available geodesy calculations it should be borne in mind that ROPP itself is internally consistent: all modules use common expressions for geodesic parameters and formulae which are held in the ropp_utils module. This is one of the strengths of the modular structure of ROPP. Geodesy is important to radio occultation in two distinct ways: “physically”, in connection with the effects of gravity on the atmosphere; and “mathematically”, in connection with the natural co-ordinate system in which to discuss the bending of radio signals during an occultation. These two facets will be discussed separately, before being brought together. 5 Culverwell: ROPP geodesy review ROM SAF Report 14 2 Gravity 2.1 Variation with latitude Numerous expressions for the Earth’s gravity field appear in the literature. The most authoritative reference appears to be the International Gravity Formula (Lambert 1945 [4]). Writing g(h;f) for the effective (ie including rotational effects) gravity at geometric height h and geographic (or geodetic) latitude f 1, Lambert gives the surface gravity as 2 2 Lambert: g(0;f) = geq(1 + b sin f − b1 sin 2f) (2.1) where (ignoring third order terms and some geometric shape factors like everyone else) b = (5=2)m − f − (17=14)m f ≈ 5:3 × 10−3 (2.2) and −6 b1 = ( f =8)( f + 2b) = ( f =8)(5m − f ) ≈ 5:9 × 10 : (2.3) Here, geq = g(0;0) is surface gravity at equator, f = (a − c)=a is the flattening of the oblate ellipsoid which is assumed to be described by the mean sea level geoid2 with semi-major and semi-minor axes 2 a and c respectively, and m = w a=geq is the ratio of centrifugal to gravitational force on the equator. For the Earth, not coincidentally3, f and m are numerically similar: f ≈ m ≈ 1=300. This makes b > 0, which implies (since b b1) that g increases towards the poles, as might be expected from both the reduced centrifugal “dilution” of gravity (m) and the smaller distance to the Earth’s centre ( f ). A glance at Eqn (2.2) shows that only one of these statements is true. More on this later. Numerically in Eqn (2.1): −2 −3 −6 geq = 9:7803253359 ms ; b = 5:3024396 × 10 ; b1 = 5:8496912 × 10 : (2.4) Eqn (2.1), or something very much like it, appears throughout the literature (eg [14], [8]). Somigliana’s equation for the surface gravity, as currently used in ROPP (ropp_utils/geodesy/gravity.f90), takes the form ([2]): q 2 2 2 Somigliana: g(0;f) = geq(1 + ks sin f)= 1 − e sin f (2.5) 1That is, the angle between the local vertical and the equatorial plane. (As opposed to the geocentric latitude, which is the angle between the radius vector from the Earth’s centre to the given point and the equatorial plane.) 2But see Section 6 for a discussion of the undulation. 3In Principia Mathematica, Newton derived f = 5m=4 for a uniformly rotating homogeneous blob of fluid (reported by White et al [16]). The non-uniform density of the Earth means that in practice f is rather closer to m. 6 ROM SAF Report 14 Culverwell: ROPP geodesy review where −3 ks(Somigliana’s constant) = (cgpo − ageq)=ageq ≈ 1:9 × 10 (2.6) and q e(eccentricity) = (a2 − c2)=a2 ≈ 8:2 × 10−2: (2.7) Here, gpo = g(0;p=2) is the surface gravity at the pole. In ROPP, the parameters in Eqn (2.5) take the values −2 −3 geq = 9:7803253359 ms ; ks = 1:931853 × 10 ; e = 0:081819: Li and Götze ([7]) quote the following second order expansion of Eqn (2.5): ∗ 2 2 Li and Götze: g(0;f) = geq(1 + f sin f − 1=4 f4 sin 2f) (2.8) where ∗ −3 f = (gpo − geq)=geq ≈ 5:3 × 10 (2.9) and −6 (1=4) f4 = ( f =8)(5m − f ) ≈ 5:9 × 10 : (2.10) [Aside: Eqn (2.10) is a bit deus ex machina as it stands since it requires something like Eqn (2.19) below to get the rotation rate m into it.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Navigation and the Global Positioning System (GPS): the Global Positioning System
    Navigation and the Global Positioning System (GPS): The Global Positioning System: Few changes of great importance to economics and safety have had more immediate impact and less fanfare than GPS. • GPS has quietly changed everything about how we locate objects and people on the Earth. • GPS is (almost) the final step toward solving one of the great conundrums of human history. Where the heck are we, anyway? In the Beginning……. • To understand what GPS has meant to navigation it is necessary to go back to the beginning. • A quick look at a ‘precision’ map of the world in the 18th century tells one a lot about how accurate our navigation was. Tools of the Trade: • Navigations early tools could only crudely estimate location. • A Sextant (or equivalent) can measure the elevation of something above the horizon. This gives your Latitude. • The Compass could provide you with a measurement of your direction, which combined with distance could tell you Longitude. • For distance…well counting steps (or wheel rotations) was the thing. An Early Triumph: • Using just his feet and a shadow, Eratosthenes determined the diameter of the Earth. • In doing so, he used the last and most elusive of our navigational tools. Time Plenty of Weaknesses: The early tools had many levels of uncertainty that were cumulative in producing poor maps of the world. • Step or wheel rotation counting has an obvious built-in uncertainty. • The Sextant gives latitude, but also requires knowledge of the Earth’s radius to determine the distance between locations. • The compass relies on the assumption that the North Magnetic pole is coincident with North Rotational pole (it’s not!) and that it is a perfect dipole (nope…).
    [Show full text]
  • Download/Pdf/Ps-Is-Qzss/Ps-Qzss-001.Pdf (Accessed on 15 June 2021)
    remote sensing Article Design and Performance Analysis of BDS-3 Integrity Concept Cheng Liu 1, Yueling Cao 2, Gong Zhang 3, Weiguang Gao 1,*, Ying Chen 1, Jun Lu 1, Chonghua Liu 4, Haitao Zhao 4 and Fang Li 5 1 Beijing Institute of Tracking and Telecommunication Technology, Beijing 100094, China; [email protected] (C.L.); [email protected] (Y.C.); [email protected] (J.L.) 2 Shanghai Astronomical Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200030, China; [email protected] 3 Institute of Telecommunication and Navigation, CAST, Beijing 100094, China; [email protected] 4 Beijing Institute of Spacecraft System Engineering, Beijing 100094, China; [email protected] (C.L.); [email protected] (H.Z.) 5 National Astronomical Observatories, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100094, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Compared to the BeiDou regional navigation satellite system (BDS-2), the BeiDou global navigation satellite system (BDS-3) carried out a brand new integrity concept design and construction work, which defines and achieves the integrity functions for major civil open services (OS) signals such as B1C, B2a, and B1I. The integrity definition and calculation method of BDS-3 are introduced. The fault tree model for satellite signal-in-space (SIS) is used, to decompose and obtain the integrity risk bottom events. In response to the weakness in the space and ground segments of the system, a variety of integrity monitoring measures have been taken. On this basis, the design values for the new B1C/B2a signal and the original B1I signal are proposed, which are 0.9 × 10−5 and 0.8 × 10−5, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Geodynamics and Rate of Volcanism on Massive Earth-Like Planets
    The Astrophysical Journal, 700:1732–1749, 2009 August 1 doi:10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/1732 C 2009. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved. Printed in the U.S.A. GEODYNAMICS AND RATE OF VOLCANISM ON MASSIVE EARTH-LIKE PLANETS E. S. Kite1,3, M. Manga1,3, and E. Gaidos2 1 Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA; [email protected] 2 Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA Received 2008 September 12; accepted 2009 May 29; published 2009 July 16 ABSTRACT We provide estimates of volcanism versus time for planets with Earth-like composition and masses 0.25–25 M⊕, as a step toward predicting atmospheric mass on extrasolar rocky planets. Volcanism requires melting of the silicate mantle. We use a thermal evolution model, calibrated against Earth, in combination with standard melting models, to explore the dependence of convection-driven decompression mantle melting on planet mass. We show that (1) volcanism is likely to proceed on massive planets with plate tectonics over the main-sequence lifetime of the parent star; (2) crustal thickness (and melting rate normalized to planet mass) is weakly dependent on planet mass; (3) stagnant lid planets live fast (they have higher rates of melting than their plate tectonic counterparts early in their thermal evolution), but die young (melting shuts down after a few Gyr); (4) plate tectonics may not operate on high-mass planets because of the production of buoyant crust which is difficult to subduct; and (5) melting is necessary but insufficient for efficient volcanic degassing—volatiles partition into the earliest, deepest melts, which may be denser than the residue and sink to the base of the mantle on young, massive planets.
    [Show full text]
  • Reference Systems for Surveying and Mapping Lecture Notes
    Delft University of Technology Reference Systems for Surveying and Mapping Lecture notes Hans van der Marel ii The front cover shows the NAP (Amsterdam Ordnance Datum) ”datum point” at the Stopera, Amsterdam (picture M.M.Minderhoud, Wikipedia/Michiel1972). H. van der Marel Lecture notes on Reference Systems for Surveying and Mapping: CTB3310 Surveying and Mapping CTB3425 Monitoring and Stability of Dikes and Embankments CIE4606 Geodesy and Remote Sensing CIE4614 Land Surveying and Civil Infrastructure February 2020 Publisher: Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences Delft University of Technology P.O. Box 5048 Stevinweg 1 2628 CN Delft The Netherlands Copyright ©2014­2020 by H. van der Marel The content in these lecture notes, except for material credited to third parties, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attributions­NonCommercial­SharedAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY­NC­SA). Third party material is shared under its own license and attribution. The text has been type set using the MikTex 2.9 implementation of LATEX. Graphs and diagrams were produced, if not mentioned otherwise, with Matlab and Inkscape. Preface This reader on reference systems for surveying and mapping has been initially compiled for the course Surveying and Mapping (CTB3310) in the 3rd year of the BSc­program for Civil Engineering. The reader is aimed at students at the end of their BSc program or at the start of their MSc program, and is used in several courses at Delft University of Technology. With the advent of the Global Positioning System (GPS) technology in mobile (smart) phones and other navigational devices almost anyone, anywhere on Earth, and at any time, can determine a three–dimensional position accurate to a few meters.
    [Show full text]
  • Geodetic Position Computations
    GEODETIC POSITION COMPUTATIONS E. J. KRAKIWSKY D. B. THOMSON February 1974 TECHNICALLECTURE NOTES REPORT NO.NO. 21739 PREFACE In order to make our extensive series of lecture notes more readily available, we have scanned the old master copies and produced electronic versions in Portable Document Format. The quality of the images varies depending on the quality of the originals. The images have not been converted to searchable text. GEODETIC POSITION COMPUTATIONS E.J. Krakiwsky D.B. Thomson Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering University of New Brunswick P.O. Box 4400 Fredericton. N .B. Canada E3B5A3 February 197 4 Latest Reprinting December 1995 PREFACE The purpose of these notes is to give the theory and use of some methods of computing the geodetic positions of points on a reference ellipsoid and on the terrain. Justification for the first three sections o{ these lecture notes, which are concerned with the classical problem of "cCDputation of geodetic positions on the surface of an ellipsoid" is not easy to come by. It can onl.y be stated that the attempt has been to produce a self contained package , cont8.i.ning the complete development of same representative methods that exist in the literature. The last section is an introduction to three dimensional computation methods , and is offered as an alternative to the classical approach. Several problems, and their respective solutions, are presented. The approach t~en herein is to perform complete derivations, thus stqing awrq f'rcm the practice of giving a list of for11111lae to use in the solution of' a problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Geodynamics: Fourier Transform Methods
    Advanced Geodynamics: Fourier Transform Methods David T. Sandwell January 13, 2021 To Susan, Katie, Melissa, Nick, and Cassie Eddie Would Go Preprint for publication by Cambridge University Press, October 16, 2020 Contents 1 Observations Related to Plate Tectonics 7 1.1 Global Maps . .7 1.2 Exercises . .9 2 Fourier Transform Methods in Geophysics 20 2.1 Introduction . 20 2.2 Definitions of Fourier Transforms . 21 2.3 Fourier Sine and Cosine Transforms . 22 2.4 Examples of Fourier Transforms . 23 2.5 Properties of Fourier transforms . 26 2.6 Solving a Linear PDE Using Fourier Methods and the Cauchy Residue Theorem . 29 2.7 Fourier Series . 32 2.8 Exercises . 33 3 Plate Kinematics 36 3.1 Plate Motions on a Flat Earth . 36 3.2 Triple Junction . 37 3.3 Plate Motions on a Sphere . 41 3.4 Velocity Azimuth . 44 3.5 Recipe for Computing Velocity Magnitude . 45 3.6 Triple Junctions on a Sphere . 45 3.7 Hot Spots and Absolute Plate Motions . 46 3.8 Exercises . 46 4 Marine Magnetic Anomalies 48 4.1 Introduction . 48 4.2 Crustal Magnetization at a Spreading Ridge . 48 4.3 Uniformly Magnetized Block . 52 4.4 Anomalies in the Earth’s Magnetic Field . 52 4.5 Magnetic Anomalies Due to Seafloor Spreading . 53 4.6 Discussion . 58 4.7 Exercises . 59 ii CONTENTS iii 5 Cooling of the Oceanic Lithosphere 61 5.1 Introduction . 61 5.2 Temperature versus Depth and Age . 65 5.3 Heat Flow versus Age . 66 5.4 Thermal Subsidence . 68 5.5 The Plate Cooling Model .
    [Show full text]
  • Coordinate Systems in Geodesy
    COORDINATE SYSTEMS IN GEODESY E. J. KRAKIWSKY D. E. WELLS May 1971 TECHNICALLECTURE NOTES REPORT NO.NO. 21716 COORDINATE SYSTElVIS IN GEODESY E.J. Krakiwsky D.E. \Vells Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering University of New Brunswick P.O. Box 4400 Fredericton, N .B. Canada E3B 5A3 May 1971 Latest Reprinting January 1998 PREFACE In order to make our extensive series of lecture notes more readily available, we have scanned the old master copies and produced electronic versions in Portable Document Format. The quality of the images varies depending on the quality of the originals. The images have not been converted to searchable text. TABLE OF CONTENTS page LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS iv LIST OF TABLES . vi l. INTRODUCTION l 1.1 Poles~ Planes and -~es 4 1.2 Universal and Sidereal Time 6 1.3 Coordinate Systems in Geodesy . 7 2. TERRESTRIAL COORDINATE SYSTEMS 9 2.1 Terrestrial Geocentric Systems • . 9 2.1.1 Polar Motion and Irregular Rotation of the Earth • . • • . • • • • . 10 2.1.2 Average and Instantaneous Terrestrial Systems • 12 2.1. 3 Geodetic Systems • • • • • • • • • • . 1 17 2.2 Relationship between Cartesian and Curvilinear Coordinates • • • • • • • . • • 19 2.2.1 Cartesian and Curvilinear Coordinates of a Point on the Reference Ellipsoid • • • • • 19 2.2.2 The Position Vector in Terms of the Geodetic Latitude • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 22 2.2.3 Th~ Position Vector in Terms of the Geocentric and Reduced Latitudes . • • • • • • • • • • • 27 2.2.4 Relationships between Geodetic, Geocentric and Reduced Latitudes • . • • • • • • • • • • 28 2.2.5 The Position Vector of a Point Above the Reference Ellipsoid . • • . • • • • • • . .• 28 2.2.6 Transformation from Average Terrestrial Cartesian to Geodetic Coordinates • 31 2.3 Geodetic Datums 33 2.3.1 Datum Position Parameters .
    [Show full text]
  • Sunsets, Tall Buildings, and the Earth's Radius
    Sunsets, tall buildings, and the Earth’s radius P.K.Aravind Physics Department Worcester Polytechnic Institute Worcester, MA 01609 ([email protected] ) ABSTRACT It is shown how repeated observations of the sunset from various points up a tall building can be used to determine the Earth’s radius. The same observations can also be used, at some latitudes, to deduce an approximate value for the amount of atmospheric refraction at the horizon. Eratosthenes appears to have been the first to have determined the Earth’s radius by measuring the altitude of the sun at noon in Alexandria on a day when he knew it to be directly overhead in Syene (Aswan) to the south [1]. Despite the vastly better methods of determining the Earth’s size and shape today, Eratosthenes’ achievement continues to inspire schoolteachers and their students around the world. I can still recall my high school principal, Mr. Jack Gibson, telling us the story of Eratosthenes on numerous occasions in his inimitable style, which required frequent audience participation from the schoolboys gathered around him. In 2005, as part of the celebrations accompanying the World Year of Physics, the American Physical Society organized a project [2] in which students from 700 high schools all over North America collaborated in a recreation of Eratosthenes’ historic experiment. The schools were teamed up in pairs, and each pair carried out measurements similar to those of Eratosthenes and pooled their results to obtain a value for the Earth’s radius. The average of all the results so obtained yielded a value for the Earth’s radius that differed from the true value by just 6%.
    [Show full text]
  • How Big Is the Earth?
    Document ID: 04_01_13_1 Date Received: 2013-04-01 Date Revised: 2013-07-24 Date Accepted: 2013-08-16 Curriculum Topic Benchmarks: M4.4.8, M5.4.12, M8.4.2, M8.4.15, S15.4.4, S.16.4.1, S16.4.3 Grade Level: High School [9-12] Subject Keywords: circumference, radius, Eratosthenes, gnomon, sun dial, Earth, noon, time zone, latitude, longitude, collaboration Rating: Advanced How Big Is the Earth? By: Stephen J Edberg, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, M/S 183-301, Pasadena CA 91011 e-mail: [email protected] From: The PUMAS Collection http://pumas.jpl.nasa.gov ©2013, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Eratosthenes, the third librarian of the Great Library of Alexandria, measured the circumference of Earth around 240 B.C.E. Having learned that the Sun passed through the zenith1 on the summer solstice2 as seen in modern day Aswan, he measured the length of a shadow on the solstice in Alexandria. By converting the measurement to an angle he determined the difference in latitude – what fraction of a circle spanned the separation – between Aswan and Alexandria. Knowing the physical distance between Aswan and Alexandria allowed him to determine the circumference of Earth. Cooperating schools can duplicate Eratosthenes’ measurements without the use of present day technology, if desired. Sharing their data permits students to calculate the circumference and the radius of Earth. The measurements do not require a site on the Tropic of Cancer (or the Tropic of Capricorn) but they must be made at local solar noon on the same date.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Positioning for Offshore Norway
    Advanced Positioning for Offshore Norway Thomas Alexander Sahl Petroleum Geoscience and Engineering Submission date: June 2014 Supervisor: Sigbjørn Sangesland, IPT Co-supervisor: Bjørn Brechan, IPT Norwegian University of Science and Technology Department of Petroleum Engineering and Applied Geophysics Summary When most people hear the word coordinates, they think of latitude and longitude, variables that describe a location on a spherical Earth. Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is far more complex. The Earth is most accurately represented by an ellipsoid, the coordinates are three-dimensional, and can be found in various forms. The coordinates are also ambiguous. Without a proper reference system, a geodetic datum, they have little meaning. This field is what is known as "Geodesy", a science of exactly describing a position on the surface of the Earth. This Thesis aims to build the foundation required for the position part of a drilling software. This is accomplished by explaining, in detail, the field of geodesy and map projections, as well as their associated formulae. Special considerations is taken for the area offshore Norway. Once the guidelines for transformation and conversion have been established, the formulae are implemented in MATLAB. All implemented functions are then verified, for every conceivable method of opera- tion. After which, both the limitation and accuracy of the various functions are discussed. More specifically, the iterative steps required for the computation of geographic coordinates, the difference between the North Sea Formulae and the Bursa-Wolf transformation, and the accuracy of Thomas-UTM series for UTM projections. The conclusion is that the recommended guidelines have been established and implemented.
    [Show full text]
  • Map Projections and Coordinate Systems Datums Tell Us the Latitudes and Longi- Vertex, Node, Or Grid Cell in a Data Set, Con- Tudes of Features on an Ellipsoid
    116 GIS Fundamentals Map Projections and Coordinate Systems Datums tell us the latitudes and longi- vertex, node, or grid cell in a data set, con- tudes of features on an ellipsoid. We need to verting the vector or raster data feature by transfer these from the curved ellipsoid to a feature from geographic to Mercator coordi- flat map. A map projection is a systematic nates. rendering of locations from the curved Earth Notice that there are parameters we surface onto a flat map surface. must specify for this projection, here R, the Nearly all projections are applied via Earth’s radius, and o, the longitudinal ori- exact or iterated mathematical formulas that gin. Different values for these parameters convert between geographic latitude and give different values for the coordinates, so longitude and projected X an Y (Easting and even though we may have the same kind of Northing) coordinates. Figure 3-30 shows projection (transverse Mercator), we have one of the simpler projection equations, different versions each time we specify dif- between Mercator and geographic coordi- ferent parameters. nates, assuming a spherical Earth. These Projection equations must also be speci- equations would be applied for every point, fied in the “backward” direction, from pro- jected coordinates to geographic coordinates, if they are to be useful. The pro- jection coordinates in this backward, or “inverse,” direction are often much more complicated that the forward direction, but are specified for every commonly used pro- jection. Most projection equations are much more complicated than the transverse Mer- cator, in part because most adopt an ellipsoi- dal Earth, and because the projections are onto curved surfaces rather than a plane, but thankfully, projection equations have long been standardized, documented, and made widely available through proven programing libraries and projection calculators.
    [Show full text]
  • Geodetic Computations on Triaxial Ellipsoid
    International Journal of Mining Science (IJMS) Volume 1, Issue 1, June 2015, PP 25-34 www.arcjournals.org Geodetic Computations on Triaxial Ellipsoid Sebahattin Bektaş Ondokuz Mayis University, Faculty of Engineering, Geomatics Engineering, Samsun, [email protected] Abstract: Rotational ellipsoid generally used in geodetic computations. Triaxial ellipsoid surface although a more general so far has not been used in geodetic applications and , the reason for this is not provided as a practical benefit in the calculations. We think this traditional thoughts ought to be revised again. Today increasing GPS and satellite measurement precision will allow us to determine more realistic earth ellipsoid. Geodetic research has traditionally been motivated by the need to continually improve approximations of physical reality. Several studies have shown that the Earth, other planets, natural satellites,asteroids and comets can be modeled as triaxial ellipsoids. In this paper we study on the computational differences in results,fitting ellipsoid, use of biaxial ellipsoid instead of triaxial elipsoid, and transformation Cartesian ( Geocentric ,Rectangular) coordinates to Geodetic coodinates or vice versa on Triaxial ellipsoid. Keywords: Reference Surface, Triaxial ellipsoid, Coordinate transformation,Cartesian, Geodetic, Ellipsoidal coordinates 1. INTRODUCTION Although Triaxial ellipsoid equation is quite simple and smooth but geodetic computations are quite difficult on the Triaxial ellipsoid. The main reason for this difficulty is the lack of symmetry. Triaxial ellipsoid generally not used in geodetic applications. Rotational ellipsoid (ellipsoid revolution ,biaxial ellipsoid , spheroid) is frequently used in geodetic applications . Triaxial ellipsoid is although a more general surface so far but has not been used in geodetic applications. The reason for this is not provided as a practical benefit in the calculations.
    [Show full text]